Skip to content

CVE-2026-56624

Improper Certificate Validation: Is CVE-2026-56624 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

signals

public sources

Exploited in wild
Not listed
CISA KEV
Public exploit
None known
Metasploit/EDB/PoC
Base severity
7.3 High
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.2%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-295 · Improper Certificate Validation
CWE

High CVSS base score, but low real-world exploitation probability (EPSS). Likely less urgent than the score implies.

baseline read

auto · not a community verdict

Real, but low real-world risk

A genuine vulnerability on paper, but EPSS shows little real-world exploitation — the base score may overstate urgency. This is not the same as a false positive.

Based on CVSS · FIRST EPSS

Confirm or dispute →

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N

Improper certificate validation in Apache MINA SSHD (server-side). Apache MINA SSHD is a Java library for client-side and server-side SSH. Server-side OpenSSH user certificate validation during user authentication in an Apache MINA SSHD server did not check for the unsupported force-command or verify-required options that could be embedded in the certificate, nor did it validate these options. As a result it was possible that a user could authenticate with such a certificate that included a force-command option but still was able to execute other commands. What other command exactly would be available to the user depends on the implementation of the server. This issue is fixed in Apache MINA SSHD 2.19.0 and 3.0.0-M5. Applications are advised to upgrade to these versions. The fix rejects OpenSSH user certificates that include these options, since Apache MINA SSHD implements neither force-command nor sk-*-cert-v01@openssh.com user certificates (which are the only ones for which verify-required would make sense).

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-56624
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-56624/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-56624)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-56624"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-56624/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-56624"></a>

Live badge that updates automatically as the community verdict changes.

Community ground truth

Be the first practitioner to weigh in

So far this is only TruePositive's editorial baseline from public sources. Add your real-world verdict below — it becomes the signal the next person triaging this relies on.

🥇 The first 50 practitioners to contribute earn a Founding Contributor badge.

In your experience, is this finding real and exploitable?

awaiting field verdicts
Real, but not a risk here
Not a real issue

Curated baseline: A curated baseline from public sources, shown separately from community verdicts.

No account needed. Anonymous verdicts post as an unverified signal. Log in to make yours verified and earn reputation.

Field notes & remediation

Verdicts are the quick signal. Notes are the evidence and fixes behind them.

  • 0
    Field note · TruePositive EditorialCurated

    This scores high on paper (CVSS 7.3) but the real-world signal is low. It is not in CISA KEV and no public exploit was found, and near-term exploitation looks unlikely (EPSS about 0%). Verify your own exposure before treating it as urgent. Not an emergency for most teams, but patch it in your normal cycle and check whether the affected component is actually exposed in your setup.

Add a field note or remediationoptional
Note type

What are you adding?

Markdown supported · minimum 20 characters.

Same weakness: CWE-295 · Improper Certificate Validation.